Rational Versus Political Models of Organisations
Rational Model
The goals of an organisation seem
obvious. Commercial organisations seek
to make a profit; trade unions to protect
their members’ interests; schools
educate their pupils; hospitals try to cure
their patients, and so on.
Within the company, the goals and
preferences are consistent among
different departments, units and
members.
Even in an organisation’s goals get
distorted, the means for achieving them
remain clear and rational. The
organisational structure provides a
rational way of achieving ends. Most
firms have an organisational chart
showing who is responsible for what.
Information available in the company is
extensive, systematic and accurate.
Even if both aims and means get
distorted, employees behave rationally
when dealing with work tasks and each
other.
Even if corporate culture can distort
reality, communication can overcome this
by showing clearly what is really
happening.
Improved top-down managerial decisionmaking can overcome the problems
listed by making choices that maximise
benefits.
Political Model
An organisational goal can get distorted:
for example, when technological
leadership takes precedence over
profitability. Union leaders can lose
touch with their members; and schools
can acquire latent functions like keeping
youngsters off the labour market.
The idea of a single, agreed
organisational goal is a fiction. Different
parties have their own set of interests
and priorities which change, and which
may be placed ahead of those of the
company as a whole.
Max Weber’s seemingly rational
organisation has many dysfunctions (for
example, goals are displaced, cliques
develop, and units compete with each
other). The formal structure (chart and
rules) only ever gives a partial guide to
factors like leadership style, employee
morale or informal group behaviour.
Ambiguous information has to be used
and is withheld strategically.
Corporations have cultures which can
distort what goes on. Culture becomes
unconsciously and uncritically adopted.
Good communication involves more than
consulting or telling people. It comes
from shared goals and values. Where
consensus on these is absent,
communication cannot fill the gap.
Perhaps the real problem is too much
management control, producing low
levels of employee involvement and
commitment. Decisions can be the
outcome of bargaining and interplays
between competing interests.
Based on Michael Joseph, “Sociology for Business”, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1989, pp 108-9; and
Jeffrey Pfeffer, “Power in Organizations”, HarperCollins, London, 1981, p 31 as referenced in:
Buchanan, D & Huczynski, A, “Organizational Behaviour – An Introductory Text”, Prentice Hall /
Financial Times 5th Ed (2004), p 844
Continued
Organisational
Characteristic
Goals, preference
Rational Model
Political Model
Consistent across participants
Power and control
Centralised
Decision process
Orderly, logical, rational
Rules and norms
Norm of optimisation
Information
Extensive, systematic,
accurate
Known, at least to a probability
estimate
Based on outcome-maximising
choice
Efficiency and effectiveness
Inconsistent, pluralistic within the
organisation
Decentralised, shifting coalitions and
interest groups
Disorderly, characterised by push
and pull of interests
Free play of market forces; conflict is
legitimate and expected
Ambiguous, information used and
withheld strategically
Disagreements about causes and
effects
Result of bargaining and interplay
among interests
Struggle, conflict, winners and losers
Beliefs about cause-effect
relationships
Decisions
Ideology
From: Huczynski, Andrzej, “Influencing within Organisations”, Routledge,
2004, Page 321 based on the work of Pfeffer, 1981